Attention Navarre defenders you are now on the clock.

[Jetstream Green]

How about this

McCown does not suck but is no where ready, came from a little college and is going to need time. Navarre does not suck, Eli Manning for instance doesn't look like a 1st round pick right now but he too is a rookie. Shawn King sucks, that is a given. It is Green's fault at QB but also his credit for a lot of other things, look at the draft and the free-agent pick ups. Don't blame Green for the RB situation. We had Shipp and he got injuried, Green didn't injure him. We had Emmitt and Green went out and got Hambrick for insurance... both went down and Green didn't injure them either. Green might not like admiting mistakes but that does not mean he does not know like the rest of us that the QB situation will have to get fixed next year. I'm going to sit back and watch Berry go after this year's sack title. Watch Dockett and Step progress. Watch Fitz and Boldin and hope they get some passes down field. I'm going to enjoy this season for what it is and will watch the Cardinals for better or worse and hope they can pull off a few more wins.

Peace

 

[conraddobler]

This is exactly what I am talking about. You are absolutely correct, there are more problems on this team than just QB. So we can ignore the clowns that think otherwise.

But where your argument totally breaks down is where you say you reject that Josh sucks because there are other problems on the team. Then you go on to say that saying Josh sucks is blaming him for more than he deserves. Assigning a rating and assigning blame are two totally different things. Saying he sucks is a rating, saying he cost us the game is blaming. I rated him, I blamed him for nothing.

That right there, is the exact mentality that floods this board that I am talking about. In fact, I even said we have no run game. But Conrad, isn't it possible that we have problems with out RB and WR units AND Josh sucks? Isn't that possible?

Why is it when I say "Josh sucks." that turns into "I blame him for losing" despite the fact I pointed out in my post that I don't think we have any run game whatsoever and no good offensive line.

Come on, isn't it possible he sucks AND everything else you said is true? I'm not asking you to say it's so, I just want you to admit it's possible for him to suck despite the rest of the offense not playing up to par.

And I agree, not throwing picks was his strength, but like I said before, if that's all you want from him you have to be able to run the ball and we can't.

My criticism of him is that he is too afraid to throw the ball passed the first down mark. Go to footballoutsiders.com and search for the article called "Complete Failures". It basically is an article about how short passes or even passes for negative yards pad a QB's stats but do nothing to win the game. If a pass is thrown for two yards on first down, it is a complete failure. If you throw a swing pass and it's blown up for a loss it's a failure, if you throw on third down and it doesn't get to the yard markers, failure. Guess who was number one in that category last year. Anquan Boldin. Roughly 1/4 of his catches last year were either extremely short on first/second down or failed to get the first down on third or fourth down.

That's McCown in a nutshell, and that's why I think he sucks. I think if FO redid this article with this years stats, McCown would have the lead in raw number of failed completes despite not starting in three weeks.

All his fault? Nope. The playcalling sucks, I was at the Bills game and I could understand running constantly but not the same run every time like it appeared they were doing, and at Takeo Spikes no less.

The WR's are too slow, we have no speed in our RB corp either. The secondary isn't that good, and I have a feeling that most of our coverage is when the pass rush is clicking, when it fails, so does the pass defense.

Special teams beyond Rackers is damn joke. We're just lucky that like the only two worse special teams are in our division.

So clearly I can see the problems with this team. I mean damn dude, you can't play a franchise in NFL 2k5 without seeing the personnel problems. I still think McCown sucks. That is a statement that stands on it's own. I'm not comparing him to King, or Navarre, or Manning, or Lomax, or whomever. I am comparing him to in my mind what an NFL QB needs to do at a minimum and that's it. But if we're going to ever have meaningful discussion on this board people need to stop taking what others say and turning it into something else.

I'm not trying to attack you personally (and I thank you for not taking it that way) but this is what I am talking about. As a board, we need to start reading and understanding what people are saying instead of taking a single statement such as "Josh sucks." and inferring several other things from it.

Wow dude, you make me wordy.

So are you saying Josh sucks or what are you saying?

Cause I think your saying he sucks.

As to the other QB's I have never said you said they were better and I agree they suck.

I could care less because of the three he's got the best arm, and the most accurate arm.

My position is that the leadership qualities he needs are the biggest problem. You could argue that the suckiness of the team is hampering a judgement on that.

His QB rating is by far the best but that dosen't mean he dosen't suck but it does go to the arguement of giving up on him.

By giving up on him and going to the others DG is saying he sucks. He agrees with you, problem is he said he didn't suck and we got Fitz to show for that.

Part of what I am saying is that DG being the great NFL dude he is should have seen signs because Josh's goofiness is the problem.

His leadership and decision making are the problem and as such you can either wait that out and see if it gets better or you can bail on him and give up because the other two do suck as of right now. Navarre may be redeamable but again DG thought he could fix King and he can't.

So far DG has managed to take the QB genius label and drag it through smelly mud.

All of this plus the stinking team around him on offense simply means to see if Josh grows up was the point and DG bailed on that.

Why? It wasn't like he didn't have the arm and we had little to gain by bailing on him because the other two suck. All of this created by DG BTW.

The point of this thread was really, good luck backing any QB forced to QB this team.

Sorry if that offends you.

 

[conraddobler]

We have no best chance to win. If there is a best chance it will be luck. I am looking straingt at Dennis Green for the prediciment we find ourself in. I did not expect to make the playoffs this year but I did expect to have a QB in waiting or training and a decent RB. DG is not putting us in a position to go anywhere this year or next year. We got a couple of decent draft picks which was offset by the people he fired. He fires a coach and replaces him with one who has never coached. I personally do not buy into the Denny Green plan what ever it is or even if there is a plan. He appears to be an Emperor and the Emperor has lost his clothes.

I would agree part of the Josh thing that infuriates me the most is that we have Fitz not Ben or Roy W because DG said so.

Josh is going to be great, another Brett Farve yadda yadda yadda.

You then bail on him after a win streak to pump up your numbers because you are starting to look very little like a genius.

Your not looking like a genius because your WR can't get deep not all Josh and he makes a convienient scapegoat at the time.

The problem is the other two handpicked backups suck too or at least are unprepared.

So by flailing with QB's you can divert the entire attention off the Fitz pick but somehow those above I doubt are buying it at this point.

DG is flailing.

Management is looking at his contract and praying for his other picks, picks not for friends and family, to bail us out now.

 

[CaptTurbo]

conrad,

Your man love for the clown is as bad as This_guys for king.

The clown sucks. The book is closed on him. Ill buy insurance from him in a year or two. Get used to it.



DEAL!

 

[Cheesebeef]

McCown at least gave us a chance to win. King and Navarre did not.

I'm only gonna say this once - but this comment is ********. Our RUSHING GAME AND DEFENSE CREATING TURNOVERS AND GETTING SACKS GAVE US A CHANCE TO WIN - tell me the last time the D produced multiple turnovers and sacks and we rushed for over a hundred yards - I'm betting(actually I'm pretty damn positive of it) it's the last time we on a game.

Navarre looked exactly like I thought he would in the second half - but I was pleasantly surprised at how he played in the first.

Josh may have even "improved" - my God if that comment isn't completely baseless considering that in the three games before he got benched he was playing his worst football of the season.

 

[Crimson Warrior]

conrad,

Your man love for the clown is as bad as This_guys for king.

The clown sucks. The book is closed on him. Ill buy insurance from him in a year or two. Get used to it.

DEAL!

Seriously swd,

Am I way off base by saying that we might be 6-6 instead of 4-8 If McCown starts the CAR, NY, and DET games?

Is that way out of line?

Anybody? because I honestly feel that way.

 

[Cheesebeef]

Seriously swd,

Am I way off base by saying that we might be 6-6 instead of 4-8 If McCown starts the CAR, NY, and DET games?

Is that way out of line?

Anybody? because I honestly feel that way.

crimson - you also thought LAST YEAR'S TEAM WAS GOING TO BE 11-5 or something ridiculous like that. Your passion for this team is noted, but a football guru you sir are not.

I think you are wayyyyyyy off base to think that somehow - with 2 of the three games on the road(where sans the Frisco game Josh has led us to a whopping 10, 3, 14 and 17 points - for an average of 11 points per game) and another at home against a team that is 9-3 that that we would have two of three. None of our wins are really all that impressive - the Giants have been horrendous since they got out of the gate quick, NO is a Defensive sieve(which we pounded by RAMMING THE BALL DONW THEIR THROATS TO THE TUNE OF 200 YARDS), the Seachickens have been completely exposed and the Dolphins are the second worst team in the league (oh and we LOST to the worst team in the league). To think that with Josh at the helm that this is a 6-6 team to me - is LUDICROUS.

I can't wait for next year when we actually have a QB and Josh is third string playing behind his younger brother.

 

[Crimson Warrior]

crimson - you also thought LAST YEAR'S TEAM WAS GOING TO BE 11-5 or something ridiculous like that. Your passion for this team is noted, but a football guru you sir are not.

I think you are wayyyyyyy off base to think that somehow - with 2 of the three games on the road(where sans the Frisco game Josh has led us to a whopping 10, 3, 14 and 17 points - for an average of 11 points per game) and another at home against a team that is 9-3 that that we would have two of three. None of our wins are really all that impressive - the Giants have been horrendous since they got out of the gate quick, NO is a Defensive sieve(which we pounded by RAMMING THE BALL DONW THEIR THROATS TO THE TUNE OF 200 YARDS), the Seachickens have been completely exposed and the Dolphins are the second worst team in the league (oh and we LOST to the worst team in the league). To think that with Josh at the helm that this is a 6-6 team to me - is LUDICROUS.

I can't wait for next year when we actually have a QB and Josh is third string playing behind his younger brother.

That I said that we would be 11-5 last year, sir, is a flat out lie. And I'll thank you to check your facts before running your mouth.

IF you want to about last year, I remember that, before we played GREEN BAY, you told everyone to bet their houses on the PACKERS.

NICE CALL CHEESEO... WHOS THE FOOTBALL GURU NOW?

LMAO!

 

[Cheesebeef]

That I said that we would be 11-5 last year, sir, is a flat out lie. And I'll thank you to check your facts before running your mouth.

IF you want to about last year, I remember that, before we played GREEN BAY, you told everyone to bet their houses on the PACKERS.

NICE CALL CHEESEO... WHOS THE FOOTBALL GURU NOW?

LMAO!

yeah - I was wrong on one game - but I didn't whiff on the entire season like you did Crimson - so what was your prediction because I'm pretty sure it was at least 9-7 (I think Brighteyes was the 1--5 one now that I think about it). Still doesn't change the fact that as much as you love this team.

Crimson - do you also remember me taking a hell of a lot of crap last season for going to Vegas for the last two road games and betting over 400 dollars against us even in the face of 15 point spreads - and winning them - EASILY?

But - yeah - you got me - I was wrong once.

 

[jerryp]

Oh I'm saying he sucks alright. Maybe sucks is the wrong term, maybe not starter material is better. But I still get the impression you think that's an unfair statement because compared to the other QB's we have he's the best.

Can't argue that. But I still think he sucks. Again, I am comparing him to what in my mind I expect from a QB, not how he compares to the others. Everything you said about the other QB's is meaningless in the context of our discussion here, because the discussion is not about the QB's, it's about McCown sucking (or not). All the stuff you threw in at the end about Denny is meaningless in this context as well.

The leadership you speak of is one of the reason I think he sucks. If Freddie isn't blocking, get in his face and tell him to block. If the wideout runs on 5 yard out on 3rd and 7, get in his face and tell him to get his ass past the marker. If there's no play, run. When you're asked why you ran so much, tell 'em you'll pass when your wideouts get open. And the thing you need to understand is he's not gonna learn this, he either has it or he doesn't. The Army doesn't just take people randomly and try and mold them into leaders, they take someone with natural leadership and augment this with some training. Same thing for QBs. You can't cram it in the noggin, it has to be there and you just pump it up a little.

And about your final comments. I'm in no way offended that you support McCown, you think he's a starter, I think he's a good backup. Fine.

My problem is that somehow being critical of the player means you put all the blame on them. You said so yourself you simply will not accept that Josh sucks because you think that means he's getting an unfair portion of the blame.

What I am desperately trying to point out is that rating a player and blaming a player are two entirely different concepts. As as you pointed out, good luck backing or not backing any QB because of this. Because you can't write something here and actually expect someone to read it and try and understand what your saying. It's just "How can you blame McCown for this?"

So I'll ask you one more time Conrad, can you at least admit, that in the reality we both inhabit, it is entirely possible McCown sucks and when we lose with him at the helm it's not entirely (or even mostly) is fault. Can you admit that? That's all I want man. I'm not even asking you to believe it, I just want you to admit it's possible.

And you have to admit it's kind of ironic making a thread demanding Navarre backers defend themselves then lamenting that backing a QB is nearly impossible on this board.

 

[Crimson Warrior]

yeah - I was wrong on one game - but I didn't whiff on the entire season like you did Crimson - so what was your prediction because I'm pretty sure it was at least 9-7 (I think Brighteyes was the 1--5 one now that I think about it). Still doesn't change the fact that as much as you love this team.

Crimson - do you also remember me taking a hell of a lot of crap last season for going to Vegas for the last two road games and betting over 400 dollars against us even in the face of 15 point spreads - and winning them - EASILY?

But - yeah - you got me - I was wrong once.

I said 8-8, maybe if they got some breaks they could go 9-7. Like 50% of the people on this board. So get of my case about it...

So what if you picked a couple of games? Who are you now, Jimmy the Greek? Are you making a living betting games? Is vegas quaking in its shoes when you walk into the belagio in a silk suit, two fine ladies on your arm, and a couple of suitcases of cash?

I really don't think so. You're probably rolling into to Reno in your Tempo.
LOL!

kidding.

go on with your bad self then cheese.

 

[football karma]

I dont know if McCown is the "answer", but I think it has been shown that he gives the Cardinals the best chance to win.

Why you start a rookie seventh round draft choice who hasnt taken a single snap in the regular season when you are still playing for the post season is beyond me.

This is as bad as Mac insisting on playing Blake long after the Cardinals had been eliminated. Now we get Denny putting in the rookie while they are still in the hunt.

The last two games were incredibly winnable. Josh McCown's mediocre QB play could have won both of those games -- while he hasnt put up gaudy numbers, he took care of the ball far better than King and Navarre have.

That being said, The Cards are out of it, and you have to now play Navarre the rest of the season-- you need to give yourself the best opportunity to figure out if this guy has a chance or not going into the offseason.

Looks like a top 10 draft pick easily.

 

[conraddobler]

Oh I'm saying he sucks alright. Maybe sucks is the wrong term, maybe not starter material is better. But I still get the impression you think that's an unfair statement because compared to the other QB's we have he's the best.

Can't argue that. But I still think he sucks. Again, I am comparing him to what in my mind I expect from a QB, not how he compares to the others. Everything you said about the other QB's is meaningless in the context of our discussion here, because the discussion is not about the QB's, it's about McCown sucking (or not). All the stuff you threw in at the end about Denny is meaningless in this context as well.

The leadership you speak of is one of the reason I think he sucks. If Freddie isn't blocking, get in his face and tell him to block. If the wideout runs on 5 yard out on 3rd and 7, get in his face and tell him to get his ass past the marker. If there's no play, run. When you're asked why you ran so much, tell 'em you'll pass when your wideouts get open. And the thing you need to understand is he's not gonna learn this, he either has it or he doesn't. The Army doesn't just take people randomly and try and mold them into leaders, they take someone with natural leadership and augment this with some training. Same thing for QBs. You can't cram it in the noggin, it has to be there and you just pump it up a little.

And about your final comments. I'm in no way offended that you support McCown, you think he's a starter, I think he's a good backup. Fine.

My problem is that somehow being critical of the player means you put all the blame on them. You said so yourself you simply will not accept that Josh sucks because you think that means he's getting an unfair portion of the blame.

What I am desperately trying to point out is that rating a player and blaming a player are two entirely different concepts. As as you pointed out, good luck backing or not backing any QB because of this. Because you can't write something here and actually expect someone to read it and try and understand what your saying. It's just "How can you blame McCown for this?"

So I'll ask you one more time Conrad, can you at least admit, that in the reality we both inhabit, it is entirely possible McCown sucks and when we lose with him at the helm it's not entirely (or even mostly) is fault. Can you admit that? That's all I want man. I'm not even asking you to believe it, I just want you to admit it's possible.

And you have to admit it's kind of ironic making a thread demanding Navarre backers defend themselves then lamenting that backing a QB is nearly impossible on this board.

I guess the concept of humor is lost here.

I meant it as half a joke as in next batter in the QB derby because it always seems someone is in love with some QB myself included.

Sort of it aint easy being me kinda idea. It's a joke.

I don't undertand half of what you are saying. I am saying Josh gives us the best chance to win right now period in hindsight foresight and sideways sight.

As to rating him or him sucking or whatever. I hold him accountable but whatever I make him accountable for the other two are worse.

He throws as many td's and less picks. Rating him as sucking has zero to do with the QB olympics because whatever you rate him the others are worse.

We can argue semantics all night but since the three QB's we have right now are the options forgive me if I think it's idiotic to suggest the other two are somehow better or acceptable just because Josh stinks.

His play is a product of the team he plays on just like the other two. The other two on this team are worse in point of fact in rating or holding accountable or whatever else you want to use.

All three would look better on better teams and all I am saying is that on a good team Josh might suddenly not be affected the way he is or he might still be goofy and have bad leadership. We don't know what the heck is going on here who's on who's side and Josh is young.

He may have tried to do some of the things you said but in the wrong circumstances it can come off wrong and backfire. I've seen this same thing happen in real life and then watch that same person learn and grow from it and not repeat the mistake. I am simply saying the things you dislike can be grown out of sometimes. Not all the time but sometimes.

Circumstances matter.

Dispute that and provide facts please.

 

[Cheesebeef]

I said 8-8, maybe if they got some breaks they could go 9-7. Like 50% of the people on this board.

The fact that you thought last year's team had ANY shot of winning 8 games and POSSIBLY 9 - says it all, but hbell - I'm talking to the same person who last year told me "that you(as in me) are very intelligent, but I don't believe you are a Cardinal fan." That one still cracks me up.

 

[Cheesebeef]

I love the fact that Josh "led" us to a victory over the SECOND WORST TEAM IN FOOTBALL and then did absolutely nothing in another win over a team who's wheels were completely falling off and have since been shown to be horrendous also is never thrown into the equation (as far as "giving us the best chance to win).

Plain and simple - our best chance to win is by playing the worst teams in the NFL, rushing for over 100 yards, getting sack and multiple turnovers and even defensive scores - that is how we won EVERY SINGLE ONE OF OUR GAMES and the fact that you guys somehow think Josh factors into that situation is mind-boggling to me.

 

[conraddobler]

I love the fact that Josh "led" us to a victory over the SECOND WORST TEAM IN FOOTBALL and then did absolutely nothing in another win over a team who's wheels were completely falling off and have since been shown to be horrendous also is never thrown into the equation (as far as "giving us the best chance to win).

Plain and simple - our best chance to win is by playing the worst teams in the NFL, rushing for over 100 yards, getting sack and multiple turnovers and even defensive scores - that is how we won EVERY SINGLE ONE OF OUR GAMES and the fact that you guys somehow think Josh factors into that situation is mind-boggling to me.

Ok look at it like this we drug Josh along by a rope and he helped out by not falling in giant crevasses along the way.

LIKE THE OTHER TWO.

 

[jerryp]

Dispute that and provide facts please.

My God man, dispute what!?

Paragraph 1 - 3 - So given that this board is mostly calling each other out and arguing I was supposed to interpret the title of this thread as a joke and not another "For all you <insert whatever> backers out there" thread? Sure. Whatever. My bad.

Paragraph 4 - The feeling is mutual and I already said I agree that Josh is the best of what we've got. Which isn't saying much.

Paragraph 5 - Rating and accountability (nice word for blame) are two different things. I've said that like three times now. You said in your first response to me that you won't accept people saying Josh sucks because that puts an unfair amount of blame on him. You clearly understand the difference between rating and blame, why don't you see how that statement is flawed? Are you trying to say he looks like he sucks because of the team and that saying he sucks is an unfair evaluation? If so, why can't you just say that because when you say unfair blame I interpret that as blame for losing and not unfair analysis.

Paragraph 6 - Yes, that is factual he has as many TD's and less picks. Yes, very good, you understand that rating him is not related to the other two. I've said three times now I judge him against an internal standard I have for QB's not against the others. You see in my mind, THERE IS NO QB OLYMPICS. There is only, does the QB pass the test? And you still don't seem to get that the others being worse doesn't make McCown not suck, it just makes him the best option. Again, we agree here and again, I have said this three times now.

Paragraph 7 - You're reaching, I am not attacking your stance on McCown. I've said before (losing count now) that he is our best option, just like you think. And wow it looks like we're making a breakthrough here. Very good, you are totally right, Josh stinking does not make the others acceptable. We're almost there, now switch 'Josh' with 'others' and 'others' with 'Josh' and you now have exactly what I've been saying for three posts now. The others stinking does not make Josh acceptable, it just makes him our best option.

Paragraph 8 - His play is the product of his skills and the team around him, not just the team. And again, we have agreed for four posts now the others are worse. You keep saying it over and over like it's going to convince me Josh is good. And again, my whole point in my second post was that Josh isn't that great. I never said that the other two were better options, yet you keep responding to me like I am. I have no other way to justify why you keep bringing up the other two in comparison to Josh. If I said the other two were better, your points would be valid. But as it is, you're arguing a point we agree on.

Paragraph 9 - Ok I think we can agree that King would suck anywhere. And the next part is opinion, I can't refute it.

Paragraph 10 - First sentence makes no sense. Do what things I said he did? You mean about chewing out Freddie or telling the receivers to figure out where the first down marker is? If it backfired to tell Freddie to get his ass blocking, I don't see how backfiring it could make Freddie block worse.

Circumstances do matter, I agree.

Ok again, dispute what?

In the whole post we have a couple stats (TD's and picks) and a bunch of "How can you not see McCown is our best option compared to King and Navarre." type statements despite the fact I've said gobs of times now that he is our best option.

So what am I supposed to refute here? I can't refute your opinion, you can't refute mine. There is no facts for me to refute in your post.

So, I'm going to try one last time to make this clear. McCown is our best option, yes. I do not think he is starting QB material. Thinking he is not starting QB material is NOT THE FREAKING SAME AS BLAMING HIM FOR OUR LOSES WHICH ACCORDING TO YOUR OWN STATEMENTS YOU BELIEVE IS TRUE. That was my whole point.

Feel free to respond with how I don't make sense, or how I should refute opinion, or tell me McCown is better than King or Navarre again as if I disagree with you or as if it relates to what I said in the first place.

I'm done with this thread.

 

[Duckjake]

McCown is a terrible passer. The reason he didn't throw many interceptions is that his passes were so far off the mark that NOBODY could catch them.

Both Josh and John have shown me nothing so far especially when I remember that Plummer in his first season in the NFL set the Cardinal rookie season passing mark and the NFL single game passing yardage by a rookie and took the Cards 98 yards for a TD in his first series as a pro, on the ROAD. In his second year all he did was QB the Cards to the 2nd round of the playoffs. And Plummer is just an average at best QB.

For those that might be interested, McCowns stats from his rookie year:

7 of 18 for 66 yards 2 INT's and No TD's for a QB rating of 10.2

Another interesting set of stats, Plummers first start:

21-40 for 195 yards and 4 INTS. Looks vaguely familiar.

 

[Russ Smith]

Another interesting set of stats, Plummers first start:

21-40 for 195 yards and 4 INTS. Looks vaguely familiar.

Could of sworn someone here mentioned that detail on Friday and got told he was being too negative on Navarre.

Expecting greatness from a rookie in his first start is silly, from a 7th rounder inactive most of the year, impossible. Some day I think Navarre may be a solid backup with a chance to start, Green threw him to the wolves for whatever reason and it showed.

 

[conraddobler]

My God man, dispute what!?

Paragraph 1 - 3 - So given that this board is mostly calling each other out and arguing I was supposed to interpret the title of this thread as a joke and not another "For all you <insert whatever> backers out there" thread? Sure. Whatever. My bad.

Paragraph 4 - The feeling is mutual and I already said I agree that Josh is the best of what we've got. Which isn't saying much.

Paragraph 5 - Rating and accountability (nice word for blame) are two different things. I've said that like three times now. You said in your first response to me that you won't accept people saying Josh sucks because that puts an unfair amount of blame on him. You clearly understand the difference between rating and blame, why don't you see how that statement is flawed? Are you trying to say he looks like he sucks because of the team and that saying he sucks is an unfair evaluation? If so, why can't you just say that because when you say unfair blame I interpret that as blame for losing and not unfair analysis.

Paragraph 6 - Yes, that is factual he has as many TD's and less picks. Yes, very good, you understand that rating him is not related to the other two. I've said three times now I judge him against an internal standard I have for QB's not against the others. You see in my mind, THERE IS NO QB OLYMPICS. There is only, does the QB pass the test? And you still don't seem to get that the others being worse doesn't make McCown not suck, it just makes him the best option. Again, we agree here and again, I have said this three times now.

Paragraph 7 - You're reaching, I am not attacking your stance on McCown. I've said before (losing count now) that he is our best option, just like you think. And wow it looks like we're making a breakthrough here. Very good, you are totally right, Josh stinking does not make the others acceptable. We're almost there, now switch 'Josh' with 'others' and 'others' with 'Josh' and you now have exactly what I've been saying for three posts now. The others stinking does not make Josh acceptable, it just makes him our best option.

Paragraph 8 - His play is the product of his skills and the team around him, not just the team. And again, we have agreed for four posts now the others are worse. You keep saying it over and over like it's going to convince me Josh is good. And again, my whole point in my second post was that Josh isn't that great. I never said that the other two were better options, yet you keep responding to me like I am. I have no other way to justify why you keep bringing up the other two in comparison to Josh. If I said the other two were better, your points would be valid. But as it is, you're arguing a point we agree on.

Paragraph 9 - Ok I think we can agree that King would suck anywhere. And the next part is opinion, I can't refute it.

Paragraph 10 - First sentence makes no sense. Do what things I said he did? You mean about chewing out Freddie or telling the receivers to figure out where the first down marker is? If it backfired to tell Freddie to get his ass blocking, I don't see how backfiring it could make Freddie block worse.

Circumstances do matter, I agree.

Ok again, dispute what?

In the whole post we have a couple stats (TD's and picks) and a bunch of "How can you not see McCown is our best option compared to King and Navarre." type statements despite the fact I've said gobs of times now that he is our best option.

So what am I supposed to refute here? I can't refute your opinion, you can't refute mine. There is no facts for me to refute in your post.

So, I'm going to try one last time to make this clear. McCown is our best option, yes. I do not think he is starting QB material. Thinking he is not starting QB material is NOT THE FREAKING SAME AS BLAMING HIM FOR OUR LOSES WHICH ACCORDING TO YOUR OWN STATEMENTS YOU BELIEVE IS TRUE. That was my whole point.

Feel free to respond with how I don't make sense, or how I should refute opinion, or tell me McCown is better than King or Navarre again as if I disagree with you or as if it relates to what I said in the first place.

I'm done with this thread.

Thanks for stopping by

 

[DieHardFromMO]

Conrad,

It looks like you and your boy are back on the clock again.

Hopefully Josh will take the training wheels off and try and make a play or two.

 

[conraddobler]

Conrad,

It looks like you and your boy are back on the clock again.

Hopefully Josh will take the training wheels off and try and make a play or two.

If I'm him I would play lights out sandlot ball.

Seriously I go completely nutz and chuck it downfield draw plays in the grass the enitre shooting match he has nothing to lose.

He's not comming back and he's basically been told he stinks and if its me I play completely relaxed and just have fun.

He's not my boy anymore because he's not comming back that ship has sailed but I do wish him well.

 

[DieHardFromMO]

Hey Conrad don't throw in the towel yet on McCown.

I admit I have never been to big of a fan of Josh, but this set of events that have unfolded just may be the turning point for him.

The pressure should be off of Josh now, there is no way King is coming back on the field unless there is an injury.

Josh should just start winging the ball down the field and start making some plays. The INT's will start to appear but that comes with the territory.

 

[D-Dogg]

The worst thing that can happen is that Josh, without pressure, looks great out there. Then we have the issue of "can he play under pressure?" It will just perpetuate the QB treadmill here.

I want a blue chipper. A real QB.

 

[conraddobler]

The worst thing that can happen is that Josh, without pressure, looks great out there. Then we have the issue of "can he play under pressure?" It will just perpetuate the QB treadmill here.

I want a blue chipper. A real QB.

I don't care if Josh looks like Peyton Manning out there he's not comming back.

The bridge is burnt IMO and so you shouldn't worry about it.